Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses read-only nature, that nothing changes, how the destination is resolved exactly like a quote, edge cases for suspended or wallet-less agents, and that signed quotes and escrowed sales keep their destination. This is unusually thorough for a query tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The definition is front-loaded with READ ONLY and the core query, and every sentence addresses a real edge case or usage rule. It is longer and denser than most tool descriptions, but the complexity of delegated-agent payout resolution justifies the length; only minor tightening is possible.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The description still covers account types, delegated views, pending requests, and resolution edge cases. For a 0-required-parameter read-only tool, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the description only repeats that slug optionally checks one template. It adds no syntax, format, or constraint details beyond the schema and the schema's own slug description. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema already documents the sole parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific read operation: listing which templates are paid to which wallet right now. It distinguishes itself from the sibling set_payout_wallet by noting that it changes nothing and that changes go through set_payout_wallet. An agent can immediately tell what this tool does without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly covers who sees what (delegated agent, person, agent account) and provides clear when-to-use context via the optional slug. It also states the when-not condition by directing destination changes to set_payout_wallet. Alternatives and scope are fully spelled out.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.